The Independent News Source
Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Obama calls for understanding, respect in abortion debate
May. 17, 2009
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF version
Printer-friendly versionSend to friendPDF versionPresident Barack Obama, speaking at Notre Dame University today, called for understanding on both sides of the abortion debate.
He told graduates at the South Bend, Indiana university that he knows the pro- and anti-abortion camps are "irreconcilable." But he says the debate must avoid "reducing those with differing views to caricature."
The following is a text of the president's speech as it was released by the White House May 17th
Thank you, Father Jenkins for that generous introduction. You are doing an outstanding job as president of this fine institution, and your continued and courageous commitment to honest, thoughtful dialogue is an inspiration to us all.
Good afternoon Father Hesburgh, Notre Dame trustees, faculty, family, friends, and the class of 2009. I am honored to be here today, and grateful to all of you for allowing me to be part of your graduation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read NCR Contributor Heidi Schlumpf's report from Notre Dame
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I want to thank you for this honorary degree. I know it has not been without controversy. I don't know if you're aware of this, but these honorary degrees are apparently pretty hard to come by. So far I'm only 1 for 2 as President. Father Hesburgh is 150 for 150. I guess that's better. Father Ted, after the ceremony, maybe you can give me some po inters on how to boost my average.
I also want to congratulate the class of 2009 for all your accomplishments. And since this is Notre Dame, I mean both in the classroom and in the competitive arena. We all know about this university's proud and storied football team, but I also hear that Notre Dame holds the largest outdoor 5-on-5 basketball tournament in the world -- Bookstore Basketball.
Now this excites me. I want to congratulate the winners of this year's tournament, a team by the name of "Hallelujah Holla Back." Well done. Though I have to say, I am personally disappointed that the "Barack O'Ballers" didn't pull it out. Next year, if you need a 6'2" forward with a decent jumper, you know where I live.
Every one of you should be proud of what you have achieved at this institution. One hundred and sixty three classes of Notre Dame graduates have sat where you are today. Some were here during years that simply rolled into the next without much notice or fanfare -- periods of relative peace and prosperity that required little by way of sacrifice or struggle.
You, however, are not getting off that easy. Your class has come of age at a moment of great consequence for our nation and the world -- a rare inflection point in history where the size and scope of the challenges before us require that we remake our world to renew its promise; that we align our deepest values and commitments to the demands of a new age. It is a privilege and a responsibility afforded to few generations -- and a task that you are now called to fulfill.
This is the generation that must find a path back to prosperity and decide how we respond to a global economy that left millions behind even before this crisis hit -- an economy where greed and short-term thinking were too often rewarded at the expense of fairness, and diligence, and an honest day's work.
We must decide how to save God's creation from a changing climate that threatens to destroy it. We must seek peace at a time when there are those who will stop at nothing to do us harm, and when weapons in the hands of a few can destroy the many. And we must find a way to reconcile our ever-shrinking world with its ever-growing diversity -- diversity of thought, of culture, and of belief.
In short, we must find a way to live together as one human family.
It is this last challenge that I'd like to talk about today. For the major threats we face in the 21st century -- whether it's global recession or violent extremism; the spread of nuclear weapons or pandemic disease -- do not discriminate. They do not recognize borders. They do not see color. They do not target specific ethnic groups.
Moreover, no one person, or religion, or nation can meet these challenges alone. Our very survival has never required greater cooperation and understanding among all people from all places than at this moment in history.
Unfortunately, finding that common ground -- recognizing that our fates are tied up, as Dr. King said, in a "single garment of destiny" -- is not easy. Part of the problem, of course, lies in the imperfections of man -- our selfishness, our pride, our stubbornness, our acquisitiveness, our insecurities, our egos; all the cruelties large and small that those of us in the Christian tradition understand to be rooted in original sin. We too often seek advantage over others. We cling to outworn prejudice and fear those who are unfamiliar. Too many of us view life only through the lens of immediate self-interest and crass materialism; in which the world is necessarily a zero-sum game. The strong too often dominate the weak, and too many of those with wealth and with power find all manner of justification for their own privilege in the face of poverty and injustice. And so, for all our technology and scientific advances, we see around the globe violence and want and strife that would seem sadly familiar to those in ancient times.
We know these things; and hopefully one of the benefits of the wonderful education you have received is that you have had time to consider these wrongs in the world, and grown determined, each in your own way, to right them. And yet, one of the vexi ng things for those of us interested in promoting greater understanding and cooperation among people is the discovery that even bringing together persons of good will, men and women of principle and purpose, can be difficult.
The soldier and the lawyer may both love this country with equal passion, and yet reach very different conclusions on the specific steps needed to protect us from harm. The gay activist and the evangelical pastor may both deplore the ravages of HIV/AIDS, but find themselves unable to bridge the cultural divide that might unite their efforts. Those who speak out against stem cell research may be rooted in admirable conviction about the sacredness of life, but so are the parents of a child with juvenile diabetes who are convinced that their son's or daughter's hardships can be relieved.
The question, then, is how do we work through these conflicts? Is it possible for us to join hands in common ef fort? As citizens of a vibrant and varied democracy, how do we engage in vigorous debate? How does each of us remain firm in our principles, and fight for what we consider right, without demonizing those with just as strongly held convictions on the other side?
Nowhere do these questions come up more powerfully than on the issue of abortion.
As I considered the controversy surrounding my visit here, I was reminded of an encounter I had during my Senate campaign, one that I describe in a book I wrote called The Audacity of Hope. A few days after I won the Democratic nomination, I received an email from a doctor who told me that while he voted for me in the primary, he had a serious concern that might prevent him from voting for me in the general election. He described himself as a Christian who was strongly pro-life, but that's not what was preventing him from voting for me .
What bothered the doctor was an entry that my campaign staff had posted on my website -- an entry that said I would fight "right-wing ideologues who want to take away a woman's right to choose." The doctor said that he had assumed I was a reasonable person, but that if I truly believed that every pro-life individual was simply an ideologue who wanted to inflict suffering on women, then I was not very reasonable. He wrote, "I do not ask at this point that you oppose abortion, only that you speak about this issue in fair-minded words."
Fair-minded words.
After I read the doctor's letter, I wrote back to him20and thanked him. I didn't change my position, but I did tell my staff to change the words on my website. And I said a prayer that night that I might extend the same presumption of good faith to others that the doctor had extended to me. Because when we do that -- when we open our hearts and our minds to those who may not think like we do or believe what we do – that's when we discover at least the possibility of common ground.
That's when we begin to say, "Maybe we won't agree on abortion, but we can still agree that this is a heart-wrenching decision for any woman to make, with both moral and spiritual dimensions.
So let's work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoption more available, and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term. Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are groun ded in clear ethics and sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women."
Understand -- I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away. No matter how much we may want to fudge it -- indeed, while we know that the views of most Americans on the subject are complex and even contradictory -- the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable.. Each side will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction. But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature.
Open hearts. Open minds. Fair-minded words.
It's a way of life that has always been the Notre Dame tradition. Father Hesburgh has long spoken of this institution as both a lighthouse and a crossroads. The lighthouse that stands apart, shining with the wisdom of the Catholic tradition, while the crossroads is where "…differences of culture and religion and conviction can co-exist with friendship, civility, hospitality, and especially love." And I want to join him and Father Jenkins in saying how inspired I am by the maturity and responsibility with which this class has approached the debate surrounding today's ceremony.
This tradition of cooperation and understanding is one that I learned in my own life many years ago -- also with the help of the Catholic Church.
I was not raised in a particularly religious household, but my mother instilled in me a sense of service and empathy that eventually led me to become a community organizer after I graduated college. A group of Catholic churches in Chicago helped fund an organization known as the Developing Communities Project, and we worked to lift up South Side neighborhoods that had been devastated when the local steel plant closed.
It was quite an eclectic crew. Catholic and Protestant churches. Jewish and African-American organizers. Working-class black and white and Hispanic residents. All of us with different experiences. All of us with different beliefs. But all of us learned to work side by side because all of us saw in these neighborhoods other human beings who needed our help -- to find jobs and improve schools. We were bound together in the service of others.
And something else happened during the time I spent in those neighborhoods. Perhaps because the church folks I worked with were so welcoming and understanding; perhaps because they invited me to their services and sang with me from their hymnals; perhaps because I witnessed all of the good works their faith inspired them to perform, I found myself drawn -- not just to work with the church, but to be in the church. It was through this service that I was brought to Christ.
At the time, Cardinal Joseph Bernardin was the Archbishop of Chicago. For those of you too young to have known him, he was a kind and good and wise man. A saintly man. I can still remember him speaking at one of the first organizing meetings I attended on the South Side. He stood as both a lighthouse and a crossroads -- unafraid to speak his mind on moral issues ranging from poverty, AIDS, and abortion to the death penalty and nuclear war. And yet, he was congenial and gentle in his persuasion, always trying to bring people together; always trying to find common ground. Just before he died, a reporter asked Cardinal Bernardin about this approach to his ministry. And he said, "You can't really get on with preaching the Gospel until you've touched minds and hearts."
My heart and mind were touched by the words and deeds of the men and women I worked alongside with in Chicago . And I'd like to think that we touched the hearts and minds of the neighborhood families whose lives we helped change. For this, I believe, is our highest calling.
You are about to enter the next phase of your life at a time of great uncertainty. You will be called upon to help restore a free market that is also fair to all who are willing to work; to seek new sources of energy that can save our planet; to give future generations the same chance that you had to receive an extraordinary education. And whether as a person drawn to public service, or someone who simply insists on being an active citizen, you will be exposed to more opinions and ideas broadcast through more means of communications than have ever existed before. You will hear talking heads scream on cable, read blogs that claim definitive knowledge, and watch politicians pretend to know what they're talking about. Occ asionally, you may also have the great fortune of seeing important issues debated by well-intentioned, brilliant minds. In fact, I suspect that many of you will be among those bright stars.
In this world of competing claims about what is right and what is true, have confidence in the values with which you've been raised and educated. Be unafraid to speak your mind when those values are at stake. Hold firm to your faith and allow it to guide you on your journey. Stand as a lighthouse.
But remember too that the ultimate irony of faith is that it necessarily admits doubt. It is the belief in things not seen. It is beyond our capacity as human beings to know with certainty what God has planned for us or what He asks of us, and those of us who believe must trust that His wisdom is greater than our own.
This doubt should not push us away from our faith.. But it should humble us. It should temper our passions, and cause us to be wary of self-righteousness. It should compel us to remain open, and curious, and eager to continue the moral and spiritual debate that began for so many of you within the walls of Notre Dame. And within our vast democracy, this doubt should remind us to persuade through reason, through an appeal whenever we can to universal rather than parochial principles, and most of all through an abiding example of good works, charity, kindness, and service that moves hearts and minds.
For if there is one law that we can be most certain of, it is the law that binds people of all faiths and no faith together. It is no coincidence that it exists in Christianity and Judaism; in Islam and Hinduism; in Buddhism and humanism. It is, of course, the Golden Rule -- the call to treat one another as we wish to be treated. The call to love. To serve. To do what we can to make a difference in the lives of those with whom we share the same brief moment on this Earth.
So many of you at Notre Dame -- by the last count, upwards of 80% -- have lived this law of love through the service you've performed at schools and hospitals; international relief agencies and local charities. That is incredibly impressive, and a powerful testament to this institution. Now you must carry the tradition forward. Make it a way of life. Because when you serve, it doesn't just improve your community, it makes you a part of your community. It breaks down walls. It fosters cooperation. And when that happens -- when people set aside their differences to work in common effort toward a common good; when they struggle together, and sacrifice together, and learn from one another -- all things are possible.
After all, I stand here today, as President and as an African-American, on the 55th anniversary of the day that the Supreme Court handed down the decision in Brown v. the Board of Education. Brown was of course the first major step in dismantling the "separate but equal" doctrine, but it would take a number of years and a nationwide movement to fully realize the dream of civil rights for all of God's children. There were freedom rides and lunch counters and Billy clubs, and there was also a Civil Rights Commission appointed by President Eisenhower. It was the twelve resolutions recommended by this commission that would ultimately become law in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
There were six members of the commission. It included five whites and one African-American; Democrats and Republicans; two Southern governors, the dean of a Southern law school, a Midwestern university president, and your own Father Ted Hesburgh, President of Notre Dame. They worked for two years, and at times, President Eisenhower had to intervene personally since no hotel or restaurant in the South would serve the black and white members of the commission together. Finally, when they reached an impasse in Louisiana, Father Ted flew them all to Notre Dame's retreat in Land O'Lakes, Wisconsin, where they eventually overcame their differences and hammered out a final deal.
Years later, President Eisenhower asked Father Ted how on Earth he was able to broker an agreement between men of such different backgrounds and beliefs. And Father Ted simply said that during their first dinner in Wisconsin , they discovered that they were all fishermen. And so he quickly readied a boat for a twilight trip out on the lake. They fished, and they talked, and they changed the course of history.
I will not pretend that the challenges we face will be easy, or that the answers will come quickly, or that all our differences and divisions will fade happily away. Life is not that simple. It never has been.
But as you leave here today, remember the lessons of Cardinal Bernardin, of Father Hesburgh, of movements for change both large and small. Remember that each of us, endowed with the dignity possessed by all children of God, has the grace to recognize ourselves in one another; to understand that we all seek the same love of family and the same fulfillment of a life well-lived. Remember that in the end, we are all fishermen.
If nothing else, that knowledge should give us faith that through our collective labor, and God's providence, and our willingness to shoulder each other's burdens, America will continue on its precious journey towards that more perfect union. Congratulations on your graduation, may God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America .
###
President Obama did OK. I was
President Obama did OK. I was brought to tears by some of the statements he made. Fair words, not too much to ask. I am strongly pro-life and will never agree with the radical pro-choice position of Barack Obama.
But I sure agree with him on universal health care, on the need to redistribute wealth, on the need to aid the downtrodden and the poor, the need to help organized labor regain its strengths.
It was Notre Dame's decision to invite him and to grant him an honorary degree. So be it.
Whilst I am pleased with his overall speech, I'm also pleased with the peaceful demonstrators who held firmly to the pro-life position.
God bless all here.
In 1981 I went from Chicago
In 1981 I went from Chicago to South Bend to protest when President Reagan was given an honorary degree at that year's commencement: Like others, I was appalled that the University would honor a man who supported those forces in El Salvador that had assassinated Archbishop Romero and murdered the four churwomen in the previous year. I am sure that today's protestors feel as angry and justified as I did 28 years ago, and I will not denigrate their protests ----or deny their right to do so. But I hope that all who protest today will read President Obama's speech, rooted in history, calling for reasonableness and reflecting the President's real affection for Cardinal Bernardin, Fr. Hesburgh and Catholic Social Teaching. The President's call for common ground, seeking to solve pressing social and political problems in as inclusive a way as possile, is a breath of fresh air and a welcome relief from the self-serving triumphalism on both sides of the debate on abortion.
I know some of the organizers who worked with Barack Obama back in the 1980's, and they saw in him a massive intelligence and a passion for justice ---neither of which have left him. Bravo, Mr. President! And Happy Anniversary, Brown v. Board of Education. How far we've come...
What about justice for the
What about justice for the unborn? Are we to just look the other way at the 4000 homicides every day because the President has other good policies?
Why don't liberal Catholics just finally admit it--to them abortion does not kill another person. They hem and haw about it, but if there were another person involved, liberals would see it the way that the Church does. But they don't see it that way. That's why they don't make a fuss over abortion--ever! Simply stated, you cannot countenance, excuse, understand, accomodate, or look past 4000 purposeful deaths of human persons every day. And you cannot support a president who does (no matter what other good things he does!)
So, just admit it--they aren't persons to you, women's rights count more, and you have other, more important things on your "justice" agenda.
Why don't conservative
Why don't conservative Catholics admit that passing laws won't end abortion. The real way to reduce abortions is to support the legislation that is aimed at doing exactly that. If you're going to talk the talk, then walk the walk.
I'll support *any*
I'll support *any* legislation to reduce the numbers of abortions--from giving tax incentives to adoption, to giving free neo-natal and post-natal care, to providing for the care of mothers abandoned for not having an abortion, to allowing mothers to drop off children with no questions asked. All of that is essential to "walking the walk" and is money well spent if you care about justice.
But, I'm sorry--your logic makes no sense regarding abortion. If (and that's a big "if") you believe that abortion kills a human person, you cannot keep it legal. After all, our laws against infanticide, murder, and a whole host of homicides do not stop those things from occuring. But we don't keep them legal because people will violate the law anyway. Outlawing a truly evil act is a huge start *if* you care about justice and the unborn and the common good.
So, when will YOU walk the walk for justice sake?
Fine, so put all of the women
Fine, so put all of the women and doctors in jail, but will that really reduce the number of abortions? It didn't before Roe vs Wade and not in countries that outlaw abortion. As a matter of fact, in the European countries where abortion is legal, the rate is much lower than those where abortion is illegal. That's one of the points that Professor Kmiec makes in supporting President Obama. He fought long and hard to make abortion illegal, but now has adopted the philosophy of doing it from the bottom up.
However, the problem is that no party will make abortions illegal. The republicans have used the issue to get the vote and then do nothing. We all can walk the walk by taking it upon ourselves to keep abortions from happening. Don't just pass laws and assume that abortions will go away. That would be just the start.
The legislation that President Obama is trying to pass will a lot more to reduce abortions compared to what the bishops or the republicans have done. And that's walking the walk.
Brian, I don't know anyone
Brian,
I don't know anyone who approves of abortion. There are people, including myself, who don't think that making abortion illegal is the answer to the problem. It didn't solve the problem before and it won't now. We have to change peoples hearts and minds. We also need to identify the reasons that women chose abortion and address them. It's hard work; much harder than passing a law.
Even if abortions were legal,
Even if abortions were legal, we could reduce abortions by millions over the next decade if legislation were passed to require high quality sonagrams to be taken before an abortion an a 3 day waiting period.
The problem is President Obama will appoint Supreme Court Justices who will declare unconstitutional any regulation such as that suggested above.
As far as people not approving abortions, President Obama, a man of wealth, said he would not want to punish his daughters with a baby if they had an unplanned pregnancy. If that is not approval, I don't know what is.
Please answer these
Please answer these questions:
1) Are the unborn human persons?
2) If they are human persons, why should it be kept legal to kill them?
3) If we already outlaw killing human persons, why not outlaw the practic here?
4) If your answer to #3 is that people won't follow the law, so what? Wouldn't your act still be just?
5) If you keep a practice legal that is grossly immoral, aren't you in some way countenancing it (even in a pluralistic society)?
I am very consistent here. There simply is no way, under philosophical, legal, or logical parameters to keep the wilful killing of a human person legal. If you propose to do so, you do it for one reason: You don't consider the unborn human persons. So, please, just admit that. So, we can stop this cat and mouse game that pro-choice people play.
1. Morally yes, legally
1. Morally yes, legally no.
2. Because the plain language of the constitution, in Amendment 14, does not
recognize them as legal persons and there has been no action by the national
legislature to change that status,even though the national legislature has the power under Amendent 14 to do so.
3. See 2.
4. It wasn't, see 2.
5. I'm not countenancing anything. The Pro-Life side has made overturning Roe a fetish. If they made the issue go away by enacting a law to recognize the unborn at some stage in the pregnancy (meaning after Gastrulation, when the blastocyst goes from being a clump of cells to an organism (a being with organs)), it would not longer be very effective for fundraising or getting out the pro-life vote for Republican candidates. The onus is on those who would protect life to write the bill. Until they do so, the fault and sin are theirs.
Quick Question: What's the
Quick Question: What's the worst thing that could happen by making abortion illegal?
Did your answer to that question rise to the level of 4000 homicides per day? If not, it should be illegal.
I'm happy to admit that to
I'm happy to admit that to me, abortion does not kill another person. Isn't that the root of our disagreement? But that doesn't mean that I don't respect the views of those who disagree with me on that point. After all, whether a fetus has a soul or not is unprovable one way or the other. We believe what we believe.
However, there are things we can do together to reduce the desire for abortion--by taking steps to reduce teen pregnancy, reduce the straits of the poorest members of our society, strengthen our communities, and increase access to birth control, we will reduce abortion. Whether you think this is actually saving lives or not, we can agree that these are good things. So shouldn't we work together on them?
So, if Mother A goes and has
So, if Mother A goes and has an abortion because she wants to see what it's like and write an article about it, and Mother B goes ahead with the pregnancy, those are morally equivalent, since the fetus is not a person?
If abortion is not the killing of another human person, why not promote it? Why do liberals always want to decrease the numbers. With Mother A, is the only thing wrong there that SHE might someday regret it?
Why not pay people to have abortions and incentivize the practice if there's nothing wrong about it?
Furthermore, you didn't offer an argument for WHY the unborn is not a human person? Did you mean unborn with brainwaves, or who can move, or who can feel pain, or one hour before birth? Does the mere fact that it is within a woman deprive it of personhood status.
Take this scenario: Some day in the future, we can do surgery on fetuses in detail. The fetus can be removed from the womb completely, operated on and made sure that the whole medical team's labor goes into the surgery, then the fetus is placed back in the womb. Because it's once again inside a woman, is it not a person? Can the woman abort it?
We already do fetal surgery.
We already do fetal surgery. Most liberals are all for changing the legal start of life, provided there is a realistic health exception. Such an exception exists when you separate conjoined twins - or anytime you have a medical procedure where two lives are at stake. Being morally squeamish is not to be morally superior.
The key is when to draw the line. It can't be so early that mothers can't get prenatal care out of fear of lawsuit if the child dies. That's what granting the fetus or embryo equal protection under law means. You can't make someone just enough of a person to fine the doctor if he or she aborts it. Once you recognize a person, there emerges a murder charge for both mother and the doctor if it is deliberately killed and a tort if it dies under medical care, even if the death was because of a genetic fault in the child itself. Most insurers would rather pay a settlement and tell doctors not provide prenatal care until the second trimester than go to trial.
This issue is not as simple or as simplistic as you think it is.
What moral decisions and compromises are YOU willing to make. So far, all we can get out of the pro-life side is a highly innappropriate (and unlikely) strategy of repealing Roe on jurisdictional grounds - mostly to be consistent with the right wing federalist position.
It is no sin to oppose that form of federalism, which is more properly called confederatism. When the strategic push is in the right area, we might take notice. Until then, don't expect my support or the support of any other Catholic Democrats.
In 1981 I went from Chicago
In 1981 I went from Chicago to South Bend to protest when President Reagan was given an honorary degree at that year's commencement: Like others, I was appalled that the University would honor a man who supported those forces in El Salvador that had assassinated Archbishop Romero and murdered the four churwomen in the previous year. I am sure that today's protestors feel as angry and justified as I did 28 years ago, and I will not denigrate their protests ----or deny their right to do so. But I hope that all who protest today will read President Obama's speech, rooted in history, calling for reasonableness and reflecting the President's real affection for Cardinal Bernardin, Fr. Hesburgh and Catholic Social Teaching. The President's call for common ground, seeking to solve pressing social and political problems in as inclusive a way as possile, is a breath of fresh air and a welcome relief from the self-serving triumphalism on both sides of the debate on abortion.
I know some of the organizers who worked with Barack Obama back in the 1980's, and they saw in him a massive intelligence and a passion for justice ---neither of which have left him. Bravo, Mr. President! And Happy Anniversary, Brown v. Board of Education. How far we've come...
I just want to say thnk you
I just want to say thnk you to everyone at Notre Dame for your persistence in seeing that we need to use our pre-frontal brain and not just our Amgdala in making decisions. When using the pre-frontal or conductor of the orchestra or rest of the brain we are using both sides of our dual process brains.
President Obama was a wise choice for commencement for the graduates of Notre Dame. I like how the leadership at Notre Dame did not run from fear that some of the Bishops of the Catholic Church tried to incite. This was great practice in controlling the emotional brain, great role models for the students body. There was a great deal of opportunity to fear loss in this decision and we are all loss aversion people. How wonderful to welcome counter views and find out that maybe they are not counter views afterall.
Go Notre Dame!
This statement of reason,
This statement of reason, respect, hope and purpose was more Christian than that of those who opposed his presence and confiring of an honorary degree. Perhaps we should realize more fully that Christianity is often effected first in words and sound as well as in activity.
President Obama is not my
President Obama is not my president, but I did listen to his speech and I was quite impressed. Now, if bishops and other church leaders in the USA would approach the issue of abortion and/or other difficult issues the way President Obama suggested, we would be able to make some realistic progress. The language and tactics used by a number of American bishops and pro-lifers is totally counter-productive and an embarrasment as far as I am concerned. I, for one, will have nothing to do with any pro-life organization, even though I am against abortion. Am I the only one?
No! Very well said. I think
No! Very well said. I think the way things have been carved up politically in the US has the devil laughing his a$$ off - so much hatred in Christ's name. It's tragic.
President Obama's speech at
President Obama's speech at Notre Dame was truly a great speech of inspiration to the Class of 2009.
President Obama's speech to
President Obama's speech to the Notre Dame Class of 2009 was truly an inspirational speech.
Amen, Alleluia! Well said,
Amen, Alleluia! Well said, President Obama!
Great speech. Wouldn't it be
Great speech. Wouldn't it be great if we all did as he asked. As a practicing catholic I'm proud of Notre Dame and proud of our President.
MR. Obama Actions Speak
MR. Obama Actions Speak Louder Than Words!
When the dust settles, Father
When the dust settles, Father Jenkins will be remembered for his wisdom in choosing President Obama
to give this year's commencement address. Obama has the potential to become a great president, one
who appeals to our "better angels" and inspires us to work together for the good of all humanity.
Brilliant speech in the midst
Brilliant speech in the midst of some hostility but he stays true to his nature to bring sides together. As a former Catholic turned Buddhist I am again ashamed of that religion and how they were so easily manipulated by the Republican Party. The heckler brought shame to the gathering but did not succeed in quelching the thirst of the crowd for President Obama. We are all one and we must all become one. Peace to the world.
As long as your are not one
As long as your are not one of the unborn.
They don't count--even when
They don't count--even when they have brain waves, can move, or can feel pain.
They aren't a part of the liberals' "justice" agenda.
Brian13, can you explain
Brian13, can you explain something....the unborn were still dying in droves under the GOP - what's your point?
An Impasse in
An Impasse in Louisiana.
Archbishop Alfred Hughes - New Orleans, LA
Bishop Glen Provost - Lake Charles, LA
Bishop Sam Jacobs - Houma-Thibodaux, LA
The three of you ought to read ONLY this portion of President Obama's Speech:
"They worked for two years, and at times, President Eisenhower had to intervene personally since no hotel or restaurant in the South would serve the black and white members of the commission together. Finally, when they reached an impasse in Louisiana, Father Ted flew them all to Notre Dame's retreat in Land O'Lakes, Wisconsin, where they eventually overcame their differences and hammered out a final deal."
Not much has changed in Louisiana since the days of President Eisenhower .
Ask these three bishops from Louisiana-
Archbishop Alfred Hughes - New Orleans, LA
Bishop Glen Provost - Lake Charles, LA
Bishop Sam Jacobs - Houma-Thibodaux, LA
as to how much success they have had during the last thirtytwo years in implementing the USCCB"s directives on Capital Punishment.
National Conference of Catholic Bishops
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20005
January 26, 1977
Archbishop Joseph L. Bernardin
http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/national/criminal/death/uscc76.shtml
Capital punishment involves profound legal and political questions; it also touches upon important moral and religious concerns. In 1974, the United States Catholic Conference declared its opposition to the reinstitution of capital punishment. Since that time a number of individual bishops, State Catholic Conferences and other Catholic organizations have actively opposed the death penalty. Many have expressed the view that in this day of increasing violence and disregard for human life, a return to the use of capital punishment can only lead to further erosion of respect for life and to the increased brutalization of our society.
Thank God for you
Thank God for you MOSES.
Perhaps the LA bishops can be inspired and CHALLENGED by the parts of Pres. Obama's speech concerning working together. If they are really pro-life, then they should be for life choices dealing with addressing poverty, eliminating capital punishment, preventing teenage pregnancy through education, and gender discrimination. If they were REALLY pro life they would put the same amount of energy and zeal into being against war as they are about abortion.
It seems by his speech, the President realizes so much more than the LA bishops that we are all God's children who should live together in peace and right relationships.
Archbishop Alfred Hughes -
Archbishop Alfred Hughes - New Orleans, LA
Bishop Glen Provost - Lake Charles, LA
Bishop Sam Jacobs - Houma-Thibodaux, LA
These Bishops are "WAITING" for orders from Cardinal Justin Rigali - Philadelphia, PA; Chairman, USCCB Pro-Life Committee to direct them to get off their "LAZINESS" and do something.
Even with a Catholic Governor, they have shown "ZERO" INTIATIVE to get something done to abolish Capital Punishment in LA.
A good start for these three
A good start for these three Bishops would be to read:
DEAD MAN WALKING by HELEN PREJEAN, ISBN: 978-0-679-75131-1 (0-679-75131-9)
One day in 1982 the Prison Coalition of Louisiana asked Sister Helen Prejean, a Catholic nun who lived and worked among the poor of New Orleans, to correspond with a death-row inmate-- a convicted killer of two teenagers. As she got to know Patrick Sonnier and to measure his fear, remorse, and humanity, her aversion to capital punishment-- an integral part of her faith and philosophy-- developed into a conviction that it can, and must, be abolished. In Dead Man Walking, the chronicle of her personal experiences with death-row inmates, Prejean introduces us not only to the prisoners themselves but to the grieving, furious families of their victims; to the people who administer the sentence of death; to the inefficient legal system; and to the expedient, occasionally capricious political choices that determine whether a prisoner will live or die. Dead Man Walking is an extraordinary and thought-provoking book that makes us reexamine some of our most fundamental beliefs.
Helen Prejean, C.S.J., was born and brought up in Baton Rouge, and has lived in Louisiana all her life. A member of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Medaille, she has long been involved in community work among the poor. Her contact with a man on Death Row in Angola State Prison led her to become an outspoken activist both against capital punishment and as an advocate for the families of murder victims. Prejean has lectured extensively on the subject of capital punishment and has appeared on ABC World News Tonight, 60 Minutes, National Public Radio, The Today Show, and an NBC special series on the death penalty. Her articles have appeared in a number of publications, including the San Francisco Chronicle and the Baltimore Sun.
The Bishops in Louisiana seem
The Bishops in Louisiana seem to have forgotten their own letter of June 2, 1994
VIOLENCE IN OUR SOCIETY: DEATH IS NOT THE ANSWER
A STATEMENT FROM THE BISHOPS OF LOUISIANA
Our problem is this: capital punishment plunges us farther into the culture of
death. We are convinced that we must choose consistently for life. This means
foregoing a right to impose the death penalty in order to reverse the culture of violence and death. We favor a deliberate and courageous decision to break the cycle of violence. We must choose life.
We therefore oppose the death penalty in our present society because we believe in the sacredness and dignity of every human life, even the life of those among us who have committed terrible crimes. We want to restrict any and all ways in which our contemporary culture proposes death as the solution to a problem. We want to release energy and creativity in the pursuit of ways to reduce crime, protect the innocent, punish the criminal, work for the change in offenders, and yet consistently stand for the respect for life even of those who treat the lives of others with disdain.
http://www.laccb.org/bins/site/content/louisiana/docs/Violence%20in%20our%20Society.pdf?_resolutionfile=ftppath|louisiana/docs/Violence%20in%20our%20Society.pdf
How refreshing and
How refreshing and encouraging it would be to hear the Pope and/or some Bishops give speeches like this one encouraging openness, trust, dialogue, and togetherness! Perhaps that could reverse the present trend away from our Church...
Pax. Aristophilos
Three quick points. 1. Make
Three quick points. 1. Make no mistake about it, in the confrontation between Obama and the pro life stalwarts, Obama carried the day. It's Obama 1, Darcy zero. But, will Obama win the battle and lose the war? That's where the real game is at, as the new Gallup poll shows the pro life position ahead in the poll for the first time in years. 2. That's where the big picture game comes up, and it comes up short. Let's face it, the Obama vs. Darcy game is not a fair match. Obama is charismatic and his default role in the media casting is that he's the good guy. When the bishops decide to challenge him, they're stepping into the shoes left vacant by that crazy woman in John McCain's rally who asked if he's "an Arab." The last churchman to play the cards right on abortion was John Paul II, who set up a high noon, high stakes showdown of the the Culture of Life vs. the Culture of Death. John Paul got the best of it, against such talented opponents as Bill Clinton, not by being confrontational but by spending decades building up a credible "Culture of Life" argument, defending human rights and social justice. Clerics like Bishop D'Arcy are hit and run mercenaries, unlikely to get the same traction. 3. Finally, let's not lose sight of the real conflict here. The most competitive game is Catholic vs. Catholic action. The real reason why the Church lost today is that the greatest point they were able to illustrate was the rift among the faithful, not only about abortion itself, but how best to handle it.
Los Angeles
California
Yes, the Gallup poll shows
Yes, the Gallup poll shows that more people call themselves pro-life rather then pro-choice. I think it was about 53%. This same result was reflected in a Pew Research poll. Yet, what is interesting is that many, if not most, of those calling themselves pro-life feel that under some circumstances abortion should be available. If you consider those who are pro-choice and those who don't want abortion available on demand, but want it available none-the-less, it is not as favorable of a reading as the pro-life community would like us to believe.
Three quick points. 1. Make
Three quick points. 1. Make no mistake about it, in the confrontation between Obama and the pro life stalwarts, Obama carried the day. It's Obama 1, Darcy zero. But, will Obama win the battle and lose the war? That's where the real game is at, as the new Gallup poll shows the pro life position ahead in the poll for the first time in years. 2. That's where the big picture game comes up, and it comes up short. Let's face it, the Obama vs. Darcy game is not a fair match. Obama is charismatic and his default role in the media casting is that he's the good guy. When the bishops decide to challenge him, they're stepping into the shoes left vacant by that crazy woman in John McCain's rally who asked if he's "an Arab." The last churchman to play the cards right on abortion was John Paul II, who set up a high noon, high stakes showdown of the the Culture of Life vs. the Culture of Death. John Paul got the best of it, against such talented opponents as Bill Clinton, not by being confrontational but by spending decades building up a credible "Culture of Life" argument, defending human rights and social justice. Clerics like Bishop D'Arcy are hit and run mercenaries, unlikely to get the same traction. 3. Finally, let's not lose sight of the real conflict here. The most competitive game is Catholic vs. Catholic action. The real reason why the Church lost today is that the greatest point they were able to illustrate was the rift among the faithful, not only about abortion itself, but how best to handle it.
As a state senator Barack
As a state senator Barack Obama pushed through legislation that denied health care to babies that survived attempted abortions, if he wants "understanding" perhaps he can explain that. I don't know how I can be expected to respect such opinions. I'm not going to stand by hoping that the other side views me as respectful and understanding while they attempt to cement into law their opinions on who is protected by law and who has no rights under law. Call me all the names you like I will continue to fight for the rights of the unborn.
Dear Anonymous, I think you
Dear Anonymous,
I think you are correct in your position about this particular point of providing emergency medical aid to viable children surviving abortion procedures, and I would join with you in opposing any such action to cut of medical care to these infants.
However, I think we must also understand that what you are talking about is very different from a structure such as a blastocyst that like the seed of a plant in so many cases in the history of a plants never are able to grow and develop. Historically, in a woman that is not on any hormonal intervention, sixty to eighty percent of these structures (blastocysts) will be simply discarded by nature. These structures have no brains, no bodies organized into organ systems, no minds and even in Church history, there were many different thoughts as to when personhood and soul was present. It is important that we and our bishops have the integrity to admit this about our own Catholic history and that there is enough integrity in the Bishops and their teachings to not misrepresent the observations of what embryologist are showing us.
There are some in our church that attempt to characterize stem cell scientists as murders. This is way out of bounds. Some of our leadership have most certainly prevented the development of new wonderful remedies for diseases. I think it important for the Bishops to not sanction their most erudite theologians but to talk to them, listen to them and try to listen to what the Holy Spirit is saying to mankind during this generation. May our Great God grant increasing wisdom to all of our leaders especially to President Obama.
Peace and Understanding,
Dennis Porch, MD
Dennis: thanks for sharing
Dennis:
thanks for sharing this.
José
Los Angeles, CA
Anonymous - Obama already did
Anonymous - Obama already did "explain" that vote - the protection for survivors of abortions was already codified, so there was no need to restate it under law. It was the nuance and added language of the new "Born Alive" Bill that Obama rejected. The "Born Alive" bill would have done nothing more to protect survivors of abortion than was already in place.
I think that the invitation
I think that the invitation and he award of an honorary degree by Notre Dame is a scandal. Now lets move on. Happy Easter! Christ is risen! Alleluia! Alleluia!
I think that you are a
I think that you are a scandal. Let's indeed move on. Christ is risen! God Bless President Obama! Alleluia Alleluia!
I liked President Obama's
I liked President Obama's speech. I pray that actions will back it up. I don't think that Notre Dame should have invited him. Also, I think that inviting him without first consulting the local Ordinary was pretty low. I have little respect for the President of Notre Dame as well the 50+ "Trustees" (or at the least the majority of them... I have great confidence in Jesus-God come in the flesh, for he write straight with crooked lines. Happy Easter! Alleluia! Alleluia!
From:
From: http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/05/17/carroll/index.html
James Carroll says it so well in an article: Notre Dame's stand against Catholic Fundamentalism
This paragraph especially - but his whole article is very thoughtful and true.
"Those Catholics who regard a moderate progressive like Barack Obama as the enemy -- despite the fact that his already unfolding social and health programs, including support for impoverished women, will do more to reduce the number of abortions in America than the glibly pro-life George W. Bush ever did -- have so purged ethical thought of any capacity to draw meaningful distinctions as to reduce religious faith to blind irrationality. They have so embraced a spirit of sectarian intolerance as to undercut the church's traditional catholicity, adding fuel to the spreading fire of religious contempt for those who depart from rigidly defined orthodoxies. They are resurrecting the lost cause of religion's war against modernity -- a war of words that folds neatly into the new century's war of weapons."
President Obama's address to the Notre Dame's graduates was an example of what a leader does. He leads. He listens. He is civil. He questions and is willing to be questioned.
Who did he listen to at Notre
Who did he listen to at Notre Dame and who questioned him at Notre Dame?
From:
From: http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/05/17/carroll/index.html
James Carroll says it so well in an article: Notre Dame's stand against Catholic Fundamentalism
This paragraph especially - but his whole article is very thoughtful and true.
"Those Catholics who regard a moderate progressive like Barack Obama as the enemy -- despite the fact that his already unfolding social and health programs, including support for impoverished women, will do more to reduce the number of abortions in America than the glibly pro-life George W. Bush ever did -- have so purged ethical thought of any capacity to draw meaningful distinctions as to reduce religious faith to blind irrationality. They have so embraced a spirit of sectarian intolerance as to undercut the church's traditional catholicity, adding fuel to the spreading fire of religious contempt for those who depart from rigidly defined orthodoxies. They are resurrecting the lost cause of religion's war against modernity -- a war of words that folds neatly into the new century's war of weapons."
President Obama's address to the Notre Dame's graduates was an example of what a leader does. He leads. He listens. He is civil. He questions and is willing to be questioned.
From:
From: http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/05/17/carroll/index.html
James Carroll says it so well in an article: Notre Dame's stand against Catholic Fundamentalism
This paragraph especially - but his whole article is very thoughtful and true.
"Those Catholics who regard a moderate progressive like Barack Obama as the enemy -- despite the fact that his already unfolding social and health programs, including support for impoverished women, will do more to reduce the number of abortions in America than the glibly pro-life George W. Bush ever did -- have so purged ethical thought of any capacity to draw meaningful distinctions as to reduce religious faith to blind irrationality. They have so embraced a spirit of sectarian intolerance as to undercut the church's traditional catholicity, adding fuel to the spreading fire of religious contempt for those who depart from rigidly defined orthodoxies. They are resurrecting the lost cause of religion's war against modernity -- a war of words that folds neatly into the new century's war of weapons."
President Obama's address to the Notre Dame's graduates was an example of what a leader does. He leads. He listens. He is civil. He questions and is willing to be questioned.
Eureka! Obama has single
Eureka! Obama has single handedly convinced me of "the need for people to be open minded, to be fair minded in the way that they approach the debate over" baby killing?!?!?!. . . .yea, right.
There's one word to describe a man who says he wants dialouge and to reduce the number of abortions, while also maintaining a 100% rating from planned parenthood: DISHONEST.
Obama supports a woman's right to chose to kill the living human BABY in her womb. So someone tell me why Catholic's are supporting him?
Sally, Why do you think it's
Sally,
Why do you think it's more important for the baby to live then for the mother to live? Seriously, why are pro-life supporters so adamant that the child's life should survive even if it costs the life of the mother? What is the theology that supports this?
Catholics are supporting
Catholics are supporting Obama rather than the Republicans because of the Republicans lack of honesty. Obama seeks to find common ground to help women faced with an unwanted pregnancy. OBAMA IS AN HONEST MAN! Obama is more honest than Bush - i.e. lying to the American people about the necessity of going to war with Iraq. Many Republicans, including Bush, authorized torture and imprisonment of prisoners at G-Bay.
God has given every person a free will to believe and act!
If he said the President is a
If he said the President is a moderate progressive, he needs a dictionary. Obama's policies are not moderate, or left of center. His policies are far left except on a few issues.
He did give an interesting speech. Although, I commend him on trying to bring people together, abortion is perhaps the one issue that can be seen as black and white. If you believe abortion is killing, then you can’t be in favor of any abortion. You can be civil and oppose abortion, or be civil and be in favor of abortion. People will either want a woman to always have the freedom to choose, or always to allow the baby to live.
We saw and heard why people
We saw and heard why people listen and respond to the President and why few listen and respond to American cardinals and bishops. Our Church has such failed leadership. Also, not one of the current leaders of the Church has .01% the moral credibility of Fr. Hesburgh. None would have stood tall to fight for racial equally. None would have fought with and joined hands with Dr. King.
We also saw and heard a great introduction by Fr. Jenkins. His was a great speech and made us proud to be Catholics.
Sadly, many of the Bishops who protested the President at ND will not have the intellectual honesty to look at their silliness and recognize that they erred and hurt themselves in the the eyes of the flock they profess to lead.
We saw and heard why people
We saw and heard why people listen and respond to the President and why few listen and respond to American cardinals and bishops. Our Church has such failed leadership. Also, not one of the current leaders of the Church has .01% the moral credibility of Fr. Hesburgh. None would have stood tall to fight for racial equally. None would have fought with and joined hands with Dr. King.
We also saw and heard a great introduction by Fr. Jenkins. His was a great speech and made us proud to be Catholics.
Sadly, many of the Bishops who protested the President at ND will not have the intellectual honesty to look at their silliness and recognize that they erred and hurt themselves in the the eyes of the flock they profess to lead.
Paul, has Father Hesburgh
Paul, has Father Hesburgh ever stood tall to fight for the unborn? He has no moral credibility because he only selects the issues that are popular and does not want to upset the liberal media.
My university graduation year
My university graduation year was 1961, 48 years ago! We were given sound values and principles at the Catholic University I attended. What was missing was the keen sense of urgency to unite with other like-minded people to work for a common vision of justice and peace for our ever shrinking global world. My hope, dear graduates of Notre Dame, is that inspired by the leadership of intelligent and dedicated women and men, such as predident Obama, your youthful enthusiasm (whose root meaning is "possessed by or filled with God)will impell you to dialogue openly, to act with integrity,and to make significant strides toward the kind of world for which we all long.
Of course Barack Obama gave a
Of course Barack Obama gave a good speech -- that is what he does. But this speech was outstanding, and I believe, touched the hearts of both Catholics and all people of good will.
The more outstanding event for me, however, was the warm and positive response he received from those at Notre Dame. The standing ovation at the end of his speech gladdened my heart with much hope for the future.
So, kudos to President Obama and to Notre Dame. It was a truly wonderful event to watch.
All the eloquent speeches in
All the eloquent speeches in the world cannot make Obama's position on abortion acceptable. If Notre Dame truly wanted to "engage" our pro-abortion president, they would have invited him to a town hall meeting, NOT given him a platform to justify his ideas. It matters not to me that he's interested in our Nation's poor,ect, because he does an awful job of protecting the most helpless members of our human family.
I don't buy the load of crap he's peddling.
"It matters not to me that
"It matters not to me that he's interested in our Nation's poor,ect,"
This is finally some truth from a radical pro lifer. The born don't count. Let's force every woman to have her child and let them die from poverty and disease.
And I don't buy yours.
And I don't buy yours.
Sally, do you really believe
Sally, do you really believe what you wrote?
Sadly, the issue of abortion has hardened your heart to all dialogue and charity! What a shame.
Also Sally, it is your attitude toward the poor that drives women into choosing to have abortions.
Maybe you can tell that to
Maybe you can tell that to the couples lining up to adopt.
p.s. Poverty doesn't justify murder.
Are they lining up to adopt
Are they lining up to adopt black children? I think not.
In the 1960's some people
In the 1960's some people were getting serious about abortion being the answer to "freeing" women. I know it was during this time there was a documentary on TV about abortion. On one side, a couple that had a son that was severly retarded and the family could not cope with the cost in money and worry. Yes, this was hard. We were to see it would have been better had this child never been born.
Speaking for life was Fr. Hesburgh explaining the value of all human life. It was memorable, it was beautiful, but we could see what was coming up. Soon abortion was preached in the courtroom with tears. After abortion was legalized sex was easy and free, premarital, extramarital, whenever, why not?
Abstinance did not bring the chaos that freedom of sex did. Women should be smarter now, better educated, proud of themselves on their own merit and all babies should be welcomed with good health care. This is what President Obama wants and what all religions want. God bless Fr. Jenkins and Fr. Hesburgh, and Pres. Obama.
As a Catholic, I'm proud of
As a Catholic, I'm proud of Notre Dame and of our president. Despite the idealogues on both sides of the abortion debate, the reality is, as Obama said:
"So let's work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoption more available, and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term. Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are groun ded in clear ethics and sound science, as well as respect for the equality of women."
Now, I challenge all of us to work for these goals instead of screaming and protesting. Of course, these are a lot harder to do than mounting protests. If we proclaim our respect for life, we need to do what is needed to support that life from womb to tomb.
My sentiments exactly, but
My sentiments exactly, but you did a much better job of stating them than I could.
As a Domer who graduated
As a Domer who graduated almost 25 years ago - I have always maintained deep love my University. I have never been more in love with our Lady's University than I was yesterday! I had classmates I hadn't heard from in years calling and e-mailing me yesterday with the same enthusiasm and pride.
I don't mean to be mean, but those Cardinals, Bishops, "Warriors" like the Newman Society, took a big hit in credibility yesterday. Notre Dame and Obama showed how to effectively and thoughtfully conduct dialogue in a way that I know pleased Mary and her Son.
What a proud moment for those students and parents....Congratulations!!!
Padre Pio, if you believe
Padre Pio, if you believe that Mary and her Son were pleased with someone who supports the killing of their little ones, then you are the south end of a north bound horse.
President Obama's speech was
President Obama's speech was outstanding and reminded me of the great speeches President Kennedy gave when I was a young college student. The difference is the family values of this president. Oh yes, President Kennedy could give a wonderous speech but then his family values did not match his words. I did not vote for President Obama but now I am so very proud to call him " my president". A big thank-you to Notre Dame's president for having the fortitude to stand by his decision to have President Obama speak.
Post new comment